All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

Navigation

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to
use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

Please Log In to Continue

Given that the UK government appears to be in Microsoft's pocket already, what difference will this make?

There are arguments for and against the GNU GPL, but somehow I think that the government should use and develop GPL software, just to prevent some corrupt/incompetent government official giving away a monopoly. If they work on and with GPL, then it gets out there for everyone.

If it's sensitive stuff, then the government isn't going to do anything with it anyway - for example the UK GCHQ "invented an

Of course, even if they do base classified work on the GPL they won't have to release the source - they only need to make the source available if they distribute binaries. No distribution of classified binaries == no required distribution of classified source.

Exactly, the government isn't going to distribute something if it's classified, independent of the licence.

I like open source software, and my stuff is GPLed, and I understand that others choose different licensing conditions, which I respect. However I don't think the government shouldn't favour one vendor over another by favouring closed source software. GPL protects everyone from unfair advantage and government patronage (or incompetence).